Sovereignty as tax policy: Reshaping Tribal governance through Tribal General Welfare Exclusion Act regulations
In the mid-1990s, IRS field agents regularly audited the tax treatment of payments from Tribal governments to Tribal citizens for cultural events and traditional ceremonial services.
20 世纪 90 年代中期，国税局外勤特工定期审核部落政府向部落公民支付文化活动和传统仪式服务费用的税务处理情况。
1 According to the IRS, powwow prizes were taxable income, which required the Tribe to issue a Form 1099 to each recipient.
1 根据美国国税局 (IRS) 的规定，仪式奖品属于应税收入，这要求部落向每位获奖者发放 1099 表格。
2 Powwows are centuries-old social, cultural, and spiritual gatherings of Native American peoples that celebrate their heritage through dancing, drumming, and community.
2 Powwows 是美洲原住民数百年历史的社会、文化和精神聚会，通过舞蹈、击鼓和社区庆祝他们的传统。
The IRS also audited Tribal education programs that provided clothing and backpacks to school-age children—programs designed to increase school attendance.
美国国税局还审核了为学龄儿童提供衣服和背包的部落教育计划，这些计划旨在提高入学率。
3 The Tribe would be required to issue a Form 1099 to the program recipient if the auditor determined that the Tribe had used gaming revenue to fund government programs.
3 如果审计员确定部落使用博彩收入资助政府项目，则部落将需要向计划接受者签发 1099 表格。
4
4
In treating Tribes as private entities, the IRS fundamentally misunderstood the sovereign status of Tribal governments and failed to appreciate the depth of social and economic disparities—shaped by a complex legacy of colonization and assimilation policies—that have profoundly influenced Native communities for generations.
在将部落视为私人实体时，国税局从根本上误解了部落政府的主权地位，并且未能认识到社会和经济差距的深度（由殖民和同化政策的复杂遗产造成），这些差距对几代人的土著社区产生了深远的影响。
This treatment reflected a long-standing structural problem in the IRS: the absence of any binding federal rule on how the “general welfare exclusion” doctrine—a tax principle developed for state and federal governments that removes general assistance benefits from a recipient’s taxable income—should apply to Tribal governments.
这种处理方式反映了国税局长期存在的结构性问题：缺乏任何具有约束力的联邦规则来规定“一般福利排除”原则（为州和联邦政府制定的一项税收原则，从接受者的应税收入中扣除一般援助福利）应如何适用于部落政府。
Without a statute, regulation, or formal IRS guidance calibrated to the realities of Tribal governance, every Tribal welfare and assistance program was evaluated against a standard designed for a fundamentally different kind of entity.
如果没有针对部落治理现实的法规、法规或正式的国税局指导，每个部落福利和援助计划都是根据为根本不同类型的实体设计的标准进行评估的。
Consequently, audit outcomes varied by region, examiner, and a given Tribe’s capacity to absorb the legal and accounting cost of defending its programs, while repeatedly exposing Tribal citizens to unexpected tax bills.
因此，审计结果因地区、审查员以及特定部落吸收捍卫其项目的法律和会计成本的能力而异，同时反复使部落公民面临意想不到的税单。
Congress finally addressed this gap in September 2014 with the Tribal General Welfare Exclusion Act (TGWEA), which added Section 139E to the Internal Revenue Code.
国会最终于 2014 年 9 月通过《部落一般福利排除法案》(TGWEA) 解决了这一差距，该法案将第 139E 条添加到《国内税收法》中。
The TGWEA created a presumption that payments from qualifying Tribal welfare programs constitute non-taxable income to the recipient, and not an otherwise taxable cash payment.
TGWEA 假设来自合格部落福利计划的付款构成接受者的非应税收入，而不是其他应税现金付款。
But without implementing regulations, the enforcement culture that animated audits of powwows and school backpack programs remained intact, Tribal program administrators remained subject to inconsistent judgments of IRS field examiners, and Tribal citizens faced continued tax uncertainties.
但如果没有实施法规，对仪式和书包项目进行动画审计的执法文化仍然完好无损，部落项目管理人员仍然受到国税局现场检查员不一致判断的影响，部落公民面临持续的税收不确定性。
Eleven years later, the U.S. Treasury Department issued final regulations implementing the TGWEA.
十一年后，美国财政部发布了实施 TGWEA 的最终法规。
The regulations, published on December 16, 2025, represent one of the most significant and transformational federal tax developments ever in Indian Country.
该法规于 2025 年 12 月 16 日发布，代表了印度国家有史以来最重要、最具变革性的联邦税收发展之一。
In addition, the extensive process by which the regulations were achieved offers a meaningful blueprint for how the federal government should operationalize its trust responsibility to Tribes across executive branch agencies historically resistant to it.
此外，制定这些法规的广泛过程为联邦政府应如何跨历史上抵制它的行政部门机构履行其对部落的信任责任提供了有意义的蓝图。
This is a story of Tribal nations reclaiming their sovereign rights to be self-governing and to determine how best to serve their people and remedy past injustices.
这是一个部落国家收回自治主权并确定如何最好地为人民服务并纠正过去不公正现象的故事。
It is a chronicle of how collective Tribal governance secured new regulations grounded on principles of Tribal sovereignty, creating a paradigm shift in federal-Tribal relations for all of Indian Country.
这是一部关于集体部落治理如何确保基于部落主权原则的新法规的编年史，为所有印第安国家创造了联邦与部落关系的范式转变。
It also is the beginning of a new evolution in good governance, in which Tribal leaders can make decisions, manage resources, and deliver services wholly responsive to their community’s needs.
这也是良好治理新发展的开始，部落领导人可以做出决策、管理资源并提供完全满足社区需求的服务。
The general welfare exclusion doctrine originally did not apply to Tribal governments.
一般福利排除原则最初并不适用于部落政府。
It developed as an administrative carve-out from the broad definition of gross income under Internal Revenue Code Section 61 for payments state and federal welfare programs made to individuals in need of services.
它是根据国内税收法第 61 条对总收入的广泛定义进行行政剥离而发展起来的，用于向需要服务的个人支付州和联邦福利计划。
As applied to those programs, the doctrine generally required that government benefits be based on individualized need––a standard drawn from the architecture of state welfare administration, built around means-testing and written eligibility criteria.
当应用于这些计划时，该学说通常要求政府福利基于个人需求——这是一个从国家福利管理架构中得出的标准，围绕经济状况调查和书面资格标准建立。
That standard, when applied to Tribes, was incongruent with Tribal sovereignty and self-governance.
该标准应用于部落时，与部落主权和自治不一致。
Tribal governments are legally and politically distinct from state governments.
部落政府在法律和政治上与州政府不同。
Their program structures, eligibility criteria, and benefit designs reflect Tribal customs and traditions, as well as the particular needs of their people––not bureaucratic templates of state welfare agencies.
他们的计划结构、资格标准和福利设计反映了部落的习俗和传统，以及人民的特殊需求，而不是国家福利机构的官僚模板。
An IRS examiner applying a state means test standard to Tribal cultural programs was measuring the needs of a distinctively and generationally oppressed population against a yardstick built for a categorically different kind of entity.
一位国税局审查员将州经济状况测试标准应用于部落文化项目，是根据为完全不同类型的实体制定的标准来衡量独特的、世代受压迫的人口的需求。
The intrusion on Tribal sovereignty was well documented in the record.
对部落主权的侵犯有详细记录。
IRS audits of Tribal benefit programs made long-term program planning functionally impossible, while Tribal finance offices were compelled to calculate individual tax liability on Tribal benefits and services.
国税局对部落福利计划的审计使得长期计划规划在功能上变得不可能，而部落财务办公室被迫计算部落福利和服务的个人纳税义务。
After years of debates and disputes with the IRS, Tribal leaders began to organize and formally challenge Treasury’s authority to audit Tribal benefits distributed to Tribal citizens.
经过与国税局多年的辩论和争议，部落领导人开始组织并正式挑战财政部审计分配给部落公民的部落福利的权力。
Two approaches developed on parallel tracks.
两种方法并行发展。
One approach, taken by the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation after recurring audits, was a direct request to the IRS for a formal legal opinion from the IRS national office on the taxability of its education and other benefit programs.
马山塔克特佩科特部落民族在反复审计后采取的一种方法是直接向美国国税局请求国税局国家办公室就其教育和其他福利计划的应税性提供正式的法律意见。
5 This opinion, called a Technical Advice Memorandum (TAM), not only resolves the specific tax issue involved in an ongoing examination, but its reasoning applies to all future comparable tax issues.
5 该意见称为技术建议备忘录 (TAM)，不仅解决了正在进行的审查中涉及的具体税务问题，而且其推理也适用于所有未来的可比税务问题。
This means that the TAM applies not only to the requesting Tribe, but potentially to all Tribes facing similar issues.
这意味着 TAM 不仅适用于提出请求的部落，还可能适用于面临类似问题的所有部落。
Thus, the stakes were high for the Pequots in submitting the TAM request.
因此，Pequots 提交 TAM 请求的风险很高。
At that time, the Pequot Tribal government provided an array of educational services to its youth, from early childhood education to tutoring and summer camp programs.
当时，佩科特部落政府向年轻人提供一系列教育服务，从幼儿教育到辅导和夏令营项目。
During audits, IRS field agents typically approached these services as cash distributions of gaming revenue subject to income tax withholding under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA).
在审计过程中，国税局现场代理通常将这些服务视为博彩收入的现金分配，并根据《印度博彩监管法》(IGRA) 缴纳所得税。
The Pequots maintained that these were general welfare benefits of the type traditionally provided by governments to their citizens.
佩科特人坚持认为，这些是传统上由政府向公民提供的一般福利。
The IRS ultimately agreed with the Tribe and issued a TAM in May 2000 finding that the educational benefits were general welfare benefits, and not per capita payments—a huge validation of the Pequot’s intentions and governance.
美国国税局最终同意部落的观点，并于 2000 年 5 月发布了一份 TAM，认定教育福利是一般福利福利，而不是人均付款——这是对佩科特部落意图和治理的巨大验证。
However, the TAM addressed only the particular programs before it, and did not establish guidance for other types of general welfare programs.
然而，TAM 仅涉及之前的特定计划，并没有为其他类型的一般福利计划制定指导。
Resolving tax issues on case-by-case basis was exceedingly costly, administratively overwhelming, and legally precarious.
逐案解决税务问题的成本极其高昂，行政上不堪重负，法律上也不稳定。
A different solution was needed.
需要一个不同的解决方案。
At the same time of the Pequot education audits, the IRS was sending tax notices to Tribal citizens across Indian Country for payments tied to ceremonial and traditional services.
在佩克特教育审计的同时，美国国税局向印第安地区的部落公民发送了与仪式和传统服务相关的付款纳税通知。
The Lummi Nation and other Tribal governments questioned the IRS’s ability to discern Tribal general welfare benefits from taxable income.
卢米民族和其他部落政府质疑国税局从应税收入中辨别部落一般福利的能力。
6 They called for a system that functionally preserved Tribal sovereignty and governmental tax exclusions that respected traditional and cultural Tribal ceremonies and practices.
6 他们呼吁建立一个在功能上维护部落主权和政府免税的制度，尊重传统和文化部落仪式和习俗。
Tribes also began to organize and, along with national advocacy groups, pressed Treasury and the IRS for clearer rules.
部落也开始组织起来，并与国家倡导团体一起向财政部和国税局施压，要求制定更明确的规则。
After years of advocacy by the United South and Eastern Tribes (USET), the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI), the Native American Finance Officers Association (NAFOA), and the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians (ATNI), Treasury eventually opened formal government-to-government consultations in 2011.
经过南部和东部部落联合组织 (USET)、美洲印第安人全国代表大会 (NCAI)、美洲原住民财务官员协会 (NAFOA) 和西北印第安人附属部落 (ATNI) 多年的倡导，财政部最终于 2011 年启动了正式的政府间磋商。
7 The following year, Treasury created “safe harbors”—categories of Tribal programs that would receive favorable tax treatment if they met stated criteria.
7 第二年，财政部创建了“安全港”——如果符合规定标准，将获得优惠税收待遇的部落计划类别。
These safe harbor programs included Tribal housing, education, elder care, disability assistance, and other qualifying assistance programs, along with cultural and religious programs.
这些安全港计划包括部落住房、教育、老年人护理、残疾援助和其他合格援助计划，以及文化和宗教计划。
8
8
While the IRS safe harbor procedure intended to materially change the agency’s approach to auditing Tribal programs and limit examination of Tribal programs, it was issued only months before Congress enacted the Tribal General Welfare Exclusion Act in 2014, leaving little opportunity to observe how IRS field offices would apply the new framework.
虽然 IRS 安全港程序旨在实质性改变该机构审计部落计划的方法并限制对部落计划的审查，但该程序是在国会于 2014 年颁布《部落一般福利排除法案》的几个月前发布的，几乎没有机会观察 IRS 外地办事处如何应用新框架。
Furthermore, despite this significant progress, administrative guidance does not have the force of law—it could be revised or withdrawn without notice, meaning the tax treatment of Tribal benefits remained subject to political will.
此外，尽管取得了这一重大进展，行政指导并不具有法律效力——它可以在没有通知的情况下进行修改或撤销，这意味着部落福利的税收待遇仍然取决于政治意愿。
With the enactment of the TGWEA, Tribal welfare programs held firmer statutory footing.
随着 TGWEA 的颁布，部落福利计划有了更坚实的法定基础。
Even more, audits and examinations of safe harbor programs were suspended until training on the new law was completed.
更重要的是，在新法律培训完成之前，对安全港计划的审计和检查被暂停。
However, critical implementation and enforcement questions remained unresolved, (including how the statutory standards would be administered), and examinations of Tribal benefits not listed in the safe harbor categories continued.
然而，关键的实施和执行问题仍未解决（包括如何管理法定标准），并且对未列入安全港类别的部落福利的审查仍在继续。
On December 15, 2025, more than a decade after Congress enacted the TGWEA and after languishing over three different presidential administrations, the Treasury Department published the law’s final regulations.
2025 年 12 月 15 日，即国会颁布 TGWEA 十多年后，经过三届不同的总统政府的苦苦挣扎，财政部发布了该法律的最终法规。
This remarkable accomplishment can be attributed to several factors that coalesced at that time, including a robust Tribal advocacy structure that generated a detailed administrative record as well as a dedicated team and leadership within Treasury committed to pursuing this goal.
这一非凡的成就可以归因于当时的几个因素，包括强大的部落倡导结构，产生了详细的行政记录，以及财政部内部致力于实现这一目标的专门团队和领导层。
The TGWEA of 2014 created the Treasury Tribal Advisory Committee (TTAC), a formal body through which Tribal governments could directly engage Treasury and the IRS on tax policy matters affecting Indian Country.
2014 年 TGWEA 成立了财政部部落咨询委员会 (TTAC)，这是一个正式机构，部落政府可以通过该机构直接与财政部和国税局就影响印第安人乡村的税收政策问题进行接触。
The TTAC became the primary vehicle through which Tribes channeled their advocacy for implementing regulations, produced formal subcommittee reports, submitted detailed written testimony, and maintained an unbroken presence in the rulemaking record across four presidential administrations.
TTAC 成为部落宣传实施法规、编写正式小组委员会报告、提交详细书面证词以及在四届总统政府的规则制定记录中不间断存在的主要工具。
The TTAC’s early work had a substantial educational component.
TTAC 的早期工作具有重要的教育意义。
It developed the technical record with testimony from Tribal leaders across the country on the contours of Tribal sovereignty.
它根据全国各地部落领袖关于部落主权轮廓的证词制定了技术记录。
One of the most important principles was the inherent right of Tribes to govern themselves—a right that predates the formation of the United States.
最重要的原则之一是部落固有的自治权——这一权利早在美国成立之前就已存在。
Tribes have a unique political relationship with the federal government, whose trust responsibility to Tribes is rooted in treaties, statutes, and court decisions.
部落与联邦政府有着独特的政治关系，联邦政府对部落的信任责任植根于条约、法规和法院判决。
9 This responsibility applies to all agencies within the federal government, including the Treasury Department and the IRS.
9 这一责任适用于联邦政府内的所有机构，包括财政部和国税局。
Yet the federal government has consistently and severely underfunded its trust and treaty obligations to provide for the welfare and well-being of Native people through services such as health care, education, housing, and public safety.
然而，联邦政府一直严重缺乏其信托和条约义务的资金不足，无法通过医疗保健、教育、住房和公共安全等服务为原住民提供福利和福祉。
10 As a result, Tribal governments bear the burden of filling the gaps by providing these services to their citizens—a responsibility they have honorably accepted under the mantle of Tribal self-determination and self-government.
10 因此，部落政府有责任通过向其公民提供这些服务来填补空白——他们在部落自决和自治的旗帜下光荣地接受了这一责任。
Revenues from Tribal enterprises are the primary source of Tribal government funding for essential community services.
部落企业的收入是部落政府基本社区服务资金的主要来源。
Many Tribes, but not all, operate gaming enterprises as a primary form of economic development.
许多部落（但不是全部）将博彩企业作为经济发展的主要形式。
Tribes must operate their gaming enterprises pursuant to the IGRA—a comprehensive regulatory scheme that defines permissible uses of gaming revenue .
部落必须根据 IGRA 运营其博彩企业，IGRA 是一项全面的监管计划，定义了博彩收入的允许用途。
11 For example, gaming revenue funds Tribal operations, including courts, public safety, natural resource management, education, and other governmental functions.
11 例如，博彩收入为部落的运营提供资金，包括法院、公共安全、自然资源管理、教育和其他政府职能。
This is the closest equivalent to a tax base for tribal governments.
这最接近部落政府的税基。
The IGRA also permits distributions of gaming revenue directly to individual Tribal citizens through per capita payments that are subject to federal income tax.
IGRA 还允许通过缴纳联邦所得税的人均付款方式将博彩收入直接分配给各个部落公民。
While the IRS understood these permissible uses of gaming revenue, it operated under a skewed view that Tribal programs funneled per capita distributions rather than distributed governmental welfare benefits.
虽然美国国税局了解博彩收入的这些允许用途，但它在运作时持有一种偏见，即部落计划集中了人均分配，而不是分配政府福利。
The TTAC worked tirelessly to shift that focus and, in doing so, confronted the real threat of IRS overreach: the demise of Tribal sovereignty.
TTAC 孜孜不倦地努力转移这一焦点，并在此过程中面临国税局越权的真正威胁：部落主权的终结。
12
12
On October 26, 2022, the TTAC General Welfare Exclusion Subcommittee produced a formal report calling for Tribal authority to design their own benefit programs and for deference to Tribal judgment on benefit levels.
2022 年 10 月 26 日，TTAC 一般福利排除小组委员会发布了一份正式报告，呼吁部落当局设计自己的福利计划，并尊重部落对福利水平的判断。
The TTAC also requested Tribal protection from retroactive IRS audits, to remove the risk that the agency could examine Tribal programs before binding regulations were promulgated, as well as confirmation that the safe harbor categories would be illustrative rather than limiting.
TTAC 还要求部落保护免受国税局追溯审计，以消除该机构在颁布具有约束力的法规之前检查部落计划的风险，并确认安全港类别是说明性的而不是限制性的。
13 One week later, then-U.S. Treasurer Lynn Malerba, the first Native American to serve in that role, invited Tribes to three consultations, explicitly acknowledging that implementing regulations were her top priority and soliciting Tribal input on key interpretive questions.
13 一周后，当时的美国财务主管林恩·马勒巴 (Lynn Malerba) 是首位担任该职位的美洲原住民，她邀请部落参加三场磋商，明确承认实施法规是她的首要任务，并征求部落对关键解释问题的意见。
14
14
Tribal participation in these consultations was substantial: More than 500 Tribal representatives attended the virtual consultations, and 65 formal comment letters were submitted to Treasury.
部落对这些磋商的参与程度很高：500 多名部落代表参加了虚拟磋商，并向财政部提交了 65 封正式评论信。
15 Tina Abrams of the Seneca Nation—a Tribal Council member whose government had been centrally involved in the TGWEA’s original passage—documented that Seneca leaders had attended every TTAC meeting and consistently submitted formal remarks.
15 塞内卡民族 (Seneca Nation) 的蒂娜·艾布拉姆斯 (Tina Abrams)（一位部落理事会成员，其政府主要参与了 TGWEA 最初的通过）记录了塞内卡领导人出席了每次 TTAC 会议并始终提交正式评论。
16 Indian Country conveyed a unified message to Treasury that the existing IRS administrative framework failed to respect Tribal sovereignty and that implementing regulations were necessary to fulfill the act’s promise of governmental parity.
16 印度国家向财政部传达了一个统一的信息，即现有的国税局行政框架未能尊重部落主权，并且需要实施法规来履行该法案对政府平等的承诺。
What made this consultation process effective was not merely the volume of participation, but also the structure of the agency’s response.
这一咨询过程之所以有效，不仅在于参与的数量，还在于该机构回应的结构。
Treasury’s consultation policy required the agency to report back to Tribes on how their input influenced agency decisionmaking.
财政部的咨询政策要求该机构向部落报告他们的意见如何影响机构决策。
That transparency and feedback loop strengthened trust with Tribes and created a documentary record that anchored the subsequent notice of proposed rulemaking process.
这种透明度和反馈循环增强了与部落的信任，并创建了一份文件记录，为随后拟议的规则制定流程通知奠定了基础。
17
17 号
Internally, the IRS disagreed with the Tribes’ position and requests for deference to Tribal self-governance.
在内部，美国国税局不同意部落的立场和尊重部落自治的要求。
During the final months of the Biden administration, these tensions intensified, with Tribes continuing to push for the recognition of Tribal sovereignty—a posture that had animated IRS enforcement practices for decades and that the new regulations were designed to supersede.
在拜登政府的最后几个月，这些紧张局势加剧，部落继续推动承认部落主权——这种态度几十年来一直激励着美国国税局的执法实践，而新法规旨在取代这种态度。
Amid this tension, Malerba remained a forceful advocate for moving the rulemaking forward.
在这种紧张局势中，马勒巴仍然是推动规则制定的有力倡导者。
As treasurer, she also led Treasury’s Office of Tribal and Native Affairs (OTNA), which coordinated Tribal policy and engagement across the department.
作为财务主管，她还领导财政部的部落和原住民事务办公室 (OTNA)，负责协调整个部门的部落政策和参与。
The OTNA gave Tribal leaders a direct channel to senior leadership.
OTNA 为部落领导人提供了接触高级领导层的直接渠道。
Malerba made a deliberate strategic decision to outwardly distinguish Tribal political status—the foundational premise of the regulations—from race-based classifications.
马莱尔巴做出了一项深思熟虑的战略决定，从表面上将部落政治地位（法规的基本前提）与基于种族的分类区分开来。
That distinction, grounded in decades of federal Indian law precedent, tended to cause internal friction.
这种区别以数十年的印度联邦法律先例为基础，往往会引起内部摩擦。
18 Tribal advocates nevertheless viewed it as essential to protecting the regulations from legal challenge during a period of heightened political scrutiny of race-conscious federal programs.
18 然而，部落倡导者认为，在对种族意识联邦计划加强政治审查的时期，保护法规免受法律挑战至关重要。
After the proposed rule was published in the Federal Register in September 2024, Treasury conducted additional Tribal consultations in November 2024.
拟议规则于 2024 年 9 月在《联邦公报》上发布后，财政部于 2024 年 11 月进行了额外的部落磋商。
19 Remarkably, a rulemaking grounded in Tribal self-determination and deference to Tribal sovereignty survived the subsequent Trump administration’s rescission of Biden-era policies expressly promoting those principles.
19 值得注意的是，随后特朗普政府废除了明确提倡这些原则的拜登时代政策，但以部落自决和尊重部落主权为基础的规则制定仍然存在。
20
20
Completing the regulations depended on continued Tribal advocacy, as well as support inside Treasury—chiefly, OTNA staff and Deputy Treasury Secretary Michael Faulkender.
法规的完成取决于部落的持续倡导以及财政部内部的支持，主要是 OTNA 工作人员和财政部副部长迈克尔·福肯德 (Michael Faulkender)。
During his confirmation process, Faulkender had publicly committed to preserving the TTAC, the government-to-government relationship, and Treasury’s Tribal affairs office, which also meant support for the TGWEA’s regulations.
在他的确认过程中，福肯德公开承诺保留 TTAC、政府与政府之间的关系以及财政部的部落事务办公室，这也意味着对 TGWEA 法规的支持。
21 That early backing from Treasury leadership mattered because it gave career officials institutional support to continue the rulemaking process.The final regulations were published on December 16, 2025—just 11 months into the new administration, after remaining unfinished under three prior administrations.
21 财政部领导层的早期支持很重要，因为它为职业官员提供了机构支持，以继续规则制定过程。最终法规于 2025 年 12 月 16 日发布——新政府上任仅 11 个月，此前三届政府仍未完成。
The final regulations codify the TGWEA’s statutory framework of deference to Tribal sovereignty across every element of the general welfare exclusion analysis.
最终法规将 TGWEA 的法定框架编入法典，在一般福利排除分析的每个要素中尊重部落主权。
They also include a companion rule for Tribally chartered enterprises, which are business entities created and organized under a Tribe’s own laws.
它们还包括针对部落特许企业的配套规则，这些企业是根据部落自己的法律创建和组织的商业实体。
Together, the rules substantially reorient the federal tax treatment of Tribal governments and the institutions through which they govern and generate revenue.
总之，这些规则大大重新调整了部落政府及其管理和创收机构的联邦税收待遇。
Under Section 139E, a qualifying Tribal general welfare benefit is excluded from a recipient’s federal taxable income.
根据第 139E 条，合格的部落一般福利福利不计入受益人的联邦应税收入中。
The benefit must be part of a qualifying Tribal government program that promotes general welfare and is available to all eligible participants.
该福利必须是符合条件的部落政府计划的一部分，该计划旨在促进一般福利，并且可供所有符合资格的参与者使用。
Further, the benefit cannot be compensation for services or considered lavish or extravagant relative to the program’s purpose and the Tribe’s particular circumstances.
此外，该福利不能是对服务的补偿，也不能被认为相对于计划的目的和部落的特殊情况来说是奢侈的或奢侈的。
The final rule explains how the IRS will apply each requirement.
最终规则解释了国税局将如何应用每项要求。
22
22
Tribes sought authority to determine what constitutes a “lavish or extravagant” benefit.
部落寻求权威来确定什么构成“奢侈或奢侈”的福利。
They were concerned about leaving such a determination to the subjective judgment of IRS examiners who had no knowledge of the history of the Tribe, Tribal governance norms, or local economic conditions.
他们担心将这样的决定留给国税局审查员的主观判断，因为他们不了解部落的历史、部落治理规范或当地的经济状况。
The IRS chief counsel’s office opposed giving deference to Tribal decisions, advocating instead for a fixed definition and enumerated limits.
美国国税局首席法律顾问办公室反对尊重部落的决定，而是主张制定固定的定义和列举的限制。
23 Treasury leadership and Tribal advocates successfully argued that no single definition or monetary value could account for the vast economic and cultural diversity of Indian Country.
23 财政部领导和部落倡导者成功地辩称，没有任何单一的定义或货币价值可以解释印第安国家巨大的经济和文化多样性。
What constitutes a reasonable housing benefit for a Tribe on Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts is not the same calculation for housing benefits on the Standing Rock Reservation in North Dakota.
马萨诸塞州玛莎葡萄园岛部落合理住房福利的构成与北达科他州立岩保留地住房福利的计算方式不同。
The sovereignty strategy was successful.
主权战略成功了。
Tribes now have sole authority over program design and benefit levels, and the IRS operates in a deferential posture to those determinations.
部落现在对计划设计和福利水平拥有唯一的权力，而国税局则以尊重这些决定的态度运作。
The final rule also directs the IRS to defer to Tribal determinations of cultural and ceremonial activities.
最终规则还指示国税局尊重部落对文化和仪式活动的决定。
Now, cash honoraria for cultural participation, powwow prizes, and awards at ceremonial events may qualify as general welfare benefits if the program is properly structured.
现在，如果该计划结构合理，文化参与、仪式奖品和仪式活动奖项的现金酬金可能有资格作为一般福利福利。
24 The regulation draws a workable line between honoring cultural activity and cash transfers generically labeled as cultural; cash, gift cards, and vehicles are generally not “items of cultural significance” without a specific program connection to Tribal culture.
24 该法规在尊重文化活动和一般被标记为文化的现金转移之间划定了一条可行的界限；如果没有与部落文化有特定的联系，现金、礼品卡和车辆通常不是“具有文化意义的物品”。
Tribes had requested that oral traditions and unwritten policies be recognized as valid program documentation.
部落要求将口头传统和不成文的政策视为有效的计划文件。
Conversely, the IRS ordinarily requires written records, defined procedures, and documented administrative histories.
相反，美国国税局通常要求书面记录、明确的程序和记录的行政历史记录。
In a significant departure from standard federal administrative expectations, the final rule accepted the Tribes’ request.
最终规则接受了部落的请求，这与标准的联邦行政期望大相径庭。
The result, which Malerba described as “remarkable,” is that the regulations explicitly accept Tribal program guidelines, including oral policies consistent with customary Tribal practices.
Malerba 形容“引人注目”的结果是，法规明确接受部落计划指南，包括符合部落习惯做法的口头政策。
25
25
The final rule also accepts the Tribes’ request that the illustrative examples in the regulations do not function as limiting checklists.
最终规则还接受了部落的要求，即法规中的说明性示例不充当限制清单。
26 The TTAC subcommittee specifically flagged the risk that IRS field agents would treat categories of safe harbor programs as an exhaustive list and disqualify new Tribal benefit programs.
26 TTAC 小组委员会特别指出了国税局现场代理将安全港计划类别视为详尽清单并取消新部落福利计划资格的风险。
The final rule addresses that risk directly.
最终规则直接解决了该风险。
While every Tribal benefit must be separately qualified, benefits and services not included in the regulation are not presumptively disqualified.
虽然每项部落福利都必须单独获得资格，但法规中未包含的福利和服务不会被推定为不合格。
27
27
During the rulemaking process, the TTAC requested a hold on IRS audits of Tribal benefit programs before the final rule came into effect.
在规则制定过程中，TTAC 要求在最终规则生效之前暂停 IRS 对部落福利计划的审计。
The final rule went even further.
最终的规则甚至更进一步。
For one, the new regulation will apply prospectively, with no retroactive audits of Tribal programs.
其一，新法规将前瞻性适用，不对部落计划进行追溯审计。
For another, it suspends IRS audits for one year, to January 1, 2027, to allow Tribes to transition to the new IRS audit standards.
另一方面，它将 IRS 审计暂停一年，即 2027 年 1 月 1 日，以便 Tribes 过渡到新的 IRS 审计标准。
28 Once the audit suspension is lifted, the IRS does not intend to open audits concerning Section 139E benefits for taxable years ending before December 16, 2025, except in circumstances of fraud.
28 一旦审计暂停解除，国税局不打算对 2025 年 12 月 16 日之前结束的纳税年度的第 139E 条福利展开审计，除非存在欺诈情况。
This agreement is important because it protects Tribal programs from being evaluated against standards that did not exist when their programs were designed.
该协议很重要，因为它可以保护部落计划免于根据其计划设计时不存在的标准进行评估。
It also recognizes the importance of training IRS field agents on new audit standards, particularly the deference requirement to Tribal program decisions.
它还认识到对国税局现场代理人进行新审计标准培训的重要性，特别是对部落计划决策的尊重要求。
It is important that Tribes use this time well.
部落好好利用这段时间很重要。
They will need to consult with their citizens on benefit priorities and options for delivering services, and explain the tax consequences of those decisions.
他们需要就福利优先事项和提供服务的选择与公民进行协商，并解释这些决定的税收后果。
Equally important will be updating the administrative processes and finance systems to optimize the Tribal general welfare exclusion protections.
同样重要的是更新行政流程和财务系统，以优化部落一般福利排除保护。
A new companion rule resolves another Tribal disadvantage in the tax rules.
新的配套规则解决了税收规则中部落的另一个劣势。
Before the final rule, a wholly owned Tribally chartered enterprise was not covered by a federal tax classification rule.
在最终规则出台之前，联邦税收分类规则不涵盖全资部落特许企业。
Tribal entities such as a Tribal housing development authority or utility company had to establish their Tribal status through an extensive IRS inquiry.
部落住房开发机构或公用事业公司等部落实体必须通过广泛的国税局调查来确定其部落地位。
Existing tax rules, however, recognize state-owned entities and federally chartered Tribal corporations.
然而，现有的税收规则承认国有实体和联邦特许的部落公司。
This gap treated Tribal businesses unfairly and created disincentives to economic development.
这种差距对部落企业不公平，并阻碍了经济发展。
29
29
The companion rule harmonizes the tax treatment of these entities and defines clear standards based on Tribal ownership and organization under Tribal law.
配套规则协调了这些实体的税收待遇，并根据部落法根据部落所有权和组织定义了明确的标准。
30 Now included are Tribally chartered gaming enterprises, energy companies, and economic development entities that operate through Tribal corporations and limited liability companies, are jointly owned by multiple Tribes, or owned by Tribal subsidiaries.
30 现在包括通过部落公司和有限责任公司运营、由多个部落共同拥有或由部落子公司拥有的部落特许博彩企业、能源公司和经济发展实体。
Although the final rule does not address entities owned in part by non-Tribal partners (an ownership structure common in energy development and infrastructure finance), Treasury and the IRS continue to consider possible guidance concerning those entities.
尽管最终规则不涉及非部落合作伙伴部分拥有的实体（能源开发和基础设施融资中常见的所有权结构），但财政部和国税局继续考虑有关这些实体的可能指导。
31
31
The TGWEA regulations carry significant economic implications that extend well beyond their technical tax mechanics.
TGWEA 法规具有重大的经济影响，其影响远远超出了其技术税收机制。
One of the most important is the historic opportunity being presented to Tribal governments and citizens to reimagine the design and delivery of benefits and services to their communities by, for example, redirecting funding for per capita payment into general welfare programs.
最重要的之一是为部落政府和公民提供了一个历史性的机会，可以通过例如将人均支付资金重新纳入一般福利计划来重新构想为其社区提供福利和服务的设计和提供。
Another imperative is the restructuring of Tribal businesses to more fully align with the rights and privileges of Tribal sovereignty.
另一个当务之急是对部落企业进行重组，以更充分地符合部落主权的权利和特权。
As noted previously, Tribal governments use gaming revenues to fund essential governmental services and invest in economic development.
如前所述，部落政府利用博彩收入为基本政府服务提供资金并投资于经济发展。
Tribes also transfer revenues to individual Tribal citizens on a per capita basis.
部落还按人均将收入转移给各个部落公民。
These payments are unconditional and can be used for any purpose.
这些付款是无条件的，可用于任何目的。
The final regulations now expressly permit gaming revenues to fund programs qualifying under Section 139E; a program’s funding source does not determine whether its benefits qualify for exclusion.
最终法规现在明确允许博彩收入资助符合第 139E 条规定的项目；项目的资金来源并不能决定其福利是否符合排除条件。
32 Per capita payments remain subject to individual federal income tax.
32 人均付款仍需缴纳个人联邦所得税。
Both uses have allowed Tribes to become truly self-determined and self-governing institutions, and have improved the quality of life at both the individual and community level.
这两种用途都使部落成为真正的自决和自治机构，并改善了个人和社区层面的生活质量。
33 It is important to note, however, that this general progress has been slow and uneven across Indian Country, and each Tribe and reservation presents unique socioeconomic circumstances.
33 然而，值得注意的是，整个印第安地区的总体进展缓慢且不平衡，每个部落和保留地都有独特的社会经济环境。
In light of the tax consequences of both models, Tribal governments now face crucial decisions on how best to serve their communities.
鉴于这两种模式的税收后果，部落政府现在面临着如何最好地为社区服务的关键决策。
Since per capita payments can be used for any purpose, the recipient may still need assistance with basic services, such health care, housing, elder care, child care, and education—leaving the Tribal government to fill those needs on a community-wide basis.
由于人均付款可用于任何目的，接受者可能仍然需要基本服务方面的援助，例如医疗保健、住房、老年人护理、儿童保育和教育，从而使部落政府在整个社区的基础上满足这些需求。
In addition, the per capita distribution model does not build durable capacity to effectively address the social welfare needs of the community or generate an economy of scale that collective service provision can achieve.
此外，人均分配模式无法建立有效满足社区社会福利需求的持久能力，也无法产生集体服务提供所能实现的规模经济。
The Tribal entity rule—which generally treats wholly owned Tribal enterprises as part of the Tribal government for federal income tax purposes—offers favorable economic opportunities.
部落实体规则——出于联邦所得税目的，通常将全资部落企业视为部落政府的一部分——提供了有利的经济机会。
With the clarification of their legal and tax status, Tribes should expect improved prospects for long-term enterprise planning and access to capital.
随着法律和税务地位的澄清，部落的长期企业规划和获得资本的前景应该会有所改善。
34
34
Under the prior “integral part” test, a Tribal enterprise with an indefinite legal status also faced uncertain tax treatment.
在之前的“整体部分”测试中，法律地位不确定的部落企业也面临着不确定的税收待遇。
Lenders and investors priced this uncertainty into the cost of capital, which disadvantaged Tribes in the marketplace.
贷款人和投资者将这种不确定性计入资本成本，这使部落在市场上处于不利地位。
The final rule removes that source of uncertainty for wholly owned Tribal entities and creates a more even playing field for business development and access to capital.
最终规则消除了全资部落实体的不确定性来源，并为业务发展和获得资本创造了更加公平的竞争环境。
One question remains unresolved: the tax treatment of partially owned Tribal entities.
有一个问题仍未解决：部分拥有的部落实体的税收待遇。
This issue impacts Tribal participation in the areas of energy development, infrastructure finance, and joint-venture commercial development by increasing finance costs due to legal uncertainty.
由于法律的不确定性，该问题增加了财务成本，影响了部落对能源开发、基础设施融资和合资商业开发领域的参与。
Treasury expressly deferred that question to future rulemaking.
财政部明确地将这个问题推迟到未来的规则制定中。
Tribal leaders demonstrated tremendous legal and political abilities in getting the rules to final publication——a feat that hopefully will be replicated on other issues important to Indian Country.
部落领导人在将规则最终公布方面表现出了巨大的法律和政治能力——这一壮举有望在对印第安国家重要的其他问题上得到复制。
Translating that achievement into Tribal governing systems will require thoughtful planning and community engagement.
将这一成就转化为部落治理系统需要深思熟虑的规划和社区参与。
Four principal risks may shape that process, detailed below.
四个主要风险可能会影响这一过程，详情如下。
One of the most profound provisions in the new rule will require an overall reorientation of the IRS enforcement ethos.
新规则中最深刻的条款之一将要求对国税局的执法精神进行全面重新定位。
After decades of questioning Tribal sovereignty, an audit posture that challenged powwow prizes and payments for ceremonial services has been replaced with something quite the opposite: deference to Tribal determinations of benefit needs and program designs.
经过数十年对部落主权的质疑，对仪式奖励和仪式服务付款提出质疑的审计姿态已被完全相反的东西所取代：尊重部落对福利需求和计划设计的决定。
Such a significant paradigm shift will take time to fully realize and will be predicated on new procedures and training around an updated enforcement identity.
这种重大的范式转变需要时间才能完全实现，并将以围绕更新的执法身份的新程序和培训为基础。
However, beyond prescribed standards and didactic training materials, IRS agents also will need to build new relationships with Tribes—hopefully, with the appreciation that the deference required under the rule equates to respect for Tribal sovereignty.
然而，除了规定的标准和教学培训材料之外，国税局官员还需要与部落建立新的关系——希望能够认识到规则所要求的尊重等同于对部落主权的尊重。
Two institutional resources are critical to buttress this transformation: the TTAC and agency leadership.
有两种机构资源对于支持这一转变至关重要：TTAC 和机构领导力。
Both must guard against bureaucratic inertia, inadequate training, and institutional skepticism about the new rule.
双方都必须警惕官僚惰性、培训不足以及对新规则的机构怀疑。
Success will depend on both sides—IRS field agents and Tribal governments—coming together with a commitment to achieve the objectives of the rule in both law and spirit.
成功将取决于双方——国税局外勤人员和部落政府——共同致力于在法律和精神上实现统治目标。
The Tribal deference rule is not unlimited.
部落尊重规则并非无限制。
For instance, while the new rule recognizes Tribal authority to provide general welfare benefits to Tribal citizens, those benefits cannot be “lavish or extravagant.” The parameters of this standard are open-ended and may lead to audit challenges, especially given the unique social and economic status of the 575 Tribal governments situated across 324 reservations throughout the country, from Florida and Alaska to California and Maine.
例如，虽然新规则承认部落有权向部落公民提供一般福利，但这些福利不能“奢侈或奢侈”。该标准的参数是开放式的，可能会带来审计挑战，特别是考虑到分布在全国 324 个保留地（从佛罗里达州和阿拉斯加到加利福尼亚州和缅因州）的 575 个部落政府的独特社会和经济地位。
In tax law, the terms “lavish” and “extravagant” typically apply to business expenses.
在税法中，“奢侈”和“奢侈”一词通常适用于业务支出。
The IRS does not define those terms in a rigid formula, but it sets standards for what expenses can be deducted: they must be ordinary and necessary for the taxpayer’s trade or business.
美国国税局并没有以严格的公式定义这些术语，但它规定了可以扣除哪些费用的标准：这些费用必须是纳税人的贸易或业务所必需的普通费用。
“Ordinary” means common and accepted in the taxpayer’s specific industry or trade.
“普通”是指在纳税人的特定行业或行业中普遍且被接受的。
“Necessary” means helpful and appropriate in carrying out the business.
“必要”是指对开展业务有帮助且适当。
When an expense is deemed “lavish or extravagant,” it fails the “ordinary and necessary” test because its cost is unreasonable relative to the facts and circumstances.
当一项费用被认为“奢侈或奢侈”时，它就无法通过“普通和必要”的测试，因为其成本相对于事实和情况来说是不合理的。
The new rule adopts a similar approach to Tribal governments and governmental entities.
新规则对部落政府和政府实体采取了类似的做法。
Rather than setting a fixed formula or dollar limit, the rule creates a presumption that Tribal benefit programs are not lavish or extravagant when Tribes provide written plans with detailed benefit parameters that describe the need and basis for the benefits, including relevant Tribal culture, history, traditions, geographic area, resources, and economic conditions.
该规则没有设定固定的公式或美元限额，而是假设部落提供书面计划，其中包含详细的福利参数，描述福利的需求和基础，包括相关的部落文化、历史、传统、地理区域、资源和经济条件，部落福利计划并不奢侈或奢侈。
IRS agents are required to give deference to those Tribal plan determinations.
美国国税局 (IRS) 探员必须尊重这些部落计划的决定。
Importantly, IRS deference is not absolute: The agency still may consider additional facts and conclude, despite the Tribe’s own account and narrative, that a particular benefit is excessive.
重要的是，国税局的尊重并不是绝对的：该机构仍然可能会考虑更多的事实，并得出结论，尽管部落自己的说法和叙述，特定的福利是过度的。
This open-ended standard creates a potential point of conflict that future guidance or litigation may need to resolve.
这一开放式标准产生了潜在的冲突点，未来的指导或诉讼可能需要解决。
Treasury expressly declined to address how TGWEA exclusions interact with eligibility determinations under other federal assistance programs, including major programs such as Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) housing assistance.
财政部明确拒绝讨论 TGWEA 排除项如何与其他联邦援助计划下的资格确定相互影响，包括医疗补助、补充营养援助计划 (SNAP) 以及住房和城市发展部 (HUD) 住房援助等主要计划。
35 This leads to a concern that a TGWEA benefit, which is not subject to federal income tax, may be counted as income by a different federal agency for purposes of determining program and funding eligibility.
35 这导致人们担心，无需缴纳联邦所得税的 TGWEA 福利可能会被不同的联邦机构视为收入，以确定计划和资助资格。
During the rulemaking process, Tribes repeatedly raised concerns about the potential of Tribal citizens’ benefits being reduced or terminated by different federal income eligibility requirements.
在规则制定过程中，部落多次对部落公民的福利可能因不同的联邦收入资格要求而减少或终止表示担忧。
Treasury declined to resolve this issue, finding that interagency coordination was outside the scope of its tax rulemaking responsibility.
财政部拒绝解决这一问题，认为机构间协调超出了其税收规则制定职责的范围。
While technically correct, the risk that Tribal gains under the TGWEA rule could be offset by eligibility losses in other programs necessitates interagency consideration.
虽然从技术上讲是正确的，但部落在 TGWEA 规则下获得的收益可能会被其他计划中的资格损失所抵消，因此需要跨机构进行考虑。
During the rulemaking process, serious consideration was given to the varying capacities of Tribal governments to comply with the new regulations.
在规则制定过程中，认真考虑了部落政府遵守新法规的不同能力。
Past experience showed that smaller or less resourced Tribes would struggle with a lengthy and complex review of Tribal programs, while Tribes with sufficient financial and accounting capabilities could withstand the audit process.
过去的经验表明，较小或资源较少的部落将难以应对部落计划的冗长而复杂的审查，而具有足够财务和会计能力的部落则可以承受审计过程。
The disparities in Tribal capacities can potentially lead to different outcomes.
部落能力的差异可能会导致不同的结果。
Recognizing these differing administrative capabilities, the TGWEA compliance framework is designed to level out the burdens imposed on Tribes by establishing minimum requirements to maintain program guidelines, internal benefit records, and other documentation responsive to IRS audit standards.
认识到这些不同的管理能力，TGWEA 合规框架旨在通过建立最低要求来维护计划指南、内部福利记录和其他符合国税局审计标准的文件，从而减轻部落的负担。
Tribal leaders and the TTAC will need to be alert to any disparate treatment in the enforcement process to avoid replicating prior patterns in which some Tribes realize most of the regulatory and economic benefits while others lag.
部落领导人和 TTAC 需要对执法过程中的任何差别待遇保持警惕，以避免重复以前的模式，即一些部落实现了大部分监管和经济利益，而其他部落则落后。
The TGWEA rulemaking process is worth examining not only for what it achieved, but also for how it achieved it.
TGWEA 的规则制定过程值得研究，不仅是它所取得的成就，还有它是如何实现的。
The institutional conditions within Treasury that made the final regulations possible—while also being durable across four presidential administrations—are replicable at other federal agencies with significant Tribal program portfolios.
财政部内部的制度条件使得最终法规成为可能——同时在四届总统政府中也能持久——可以在拥有重要部落计划组合的其他联邦机构复制。
Three structural elements were essential.
三个结构要素至关重要。
First, a dedicated career team within Treasury, the Office of Tribal and Native Affairs (OTNA), provided federal Indian law expertise and served as a real time liaison to Tribal governments.
首先，财政部、部落和原住民事务办公室 (OTNA) 内有一个专门的职业团队，提供联邦印第安人法律专业知识，并充当与部落政府的实时联络人。
Second, a statutory advisory body—the TTAC itself, with a mandate to advise the Treasury secretary—used published reports and recommendations to create a documentary record that anchored the rulemaking process and constrained the IRS’s ability to dismiss it as informal Tribal input.
其次，一个法定咨询机构——TTAC本身，其任务是向财政部长提供建议——利用已发表的报告和建议来创建一份文件记录，以支撑规则制定过程，并限制国税局将其视为非正式部落意见而予以驳回的能力。
Third, a meaningful consultation policy that required the agency to solicit Tribal input and report back on how that information influenced agency decisions created a real time feedback loop that transformed the consultation process from a federal box-checking exercise into a substantive policy-shaping mechanism.
第三，一项有意义的咨询政策要求该机构征求部落的意见并报告这些信息如何影响机构的决策，从而创建了一个实时反馈循环，将咨询过程从联邦检查活动转变为实质性的政策制定机制。
36 Treasury’s engagement with Tribes went beyond the typical consultation practice—and this, as well as Tribal persistence, contributed significantly to the successful rulemaking outcome.
36 财政部与部落的接触超出了典型的协商做法，而这一点以及部落的坚持为规则制定的成功结果做出了重大贡献。
Tribal consultation is a formal policy framework that guides agencies on how to engage with Tribes in a respectful, consistent, and effective manner.
部落协商是一个正式的政策框架，指导各机构如何以尊重、一致和有效的方式与部落合作。
These policies, rooted in Executive Order 13175 and federal statutes, aim to ensure that Tribal priorities, rights, and sovereignty are respected in agency actions.
这些政策植根于第 13175 号行政命令和联邦法规，旨在确保部落的优先事项、权利和主权在机构行动中得到尊重。
Agencies with substantial Tribal grant and program portfolios—such as the departments of the Interior, Justice, Agriculture, Health and Human Services (HHS), and HUD, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency—all have a Tribal consultation policy.
拥有大量部落拨款和项目组合的机构——例如内政部、司法部、农业部、卫生与公众服务部 (HHS)、HUD 以及环境保护局——都制定了部落协商政策。
What the TGWEA rulemaking experience demonstrated, however, is a different type and level of engagement that built trust and accountability while shaping agency decisions.
然而，TGWEA 规则制定经验表明，不同类型和水平的参与在制定机构决策的同时建立了信任和责任。
The TGWEA rulemaking process also required internal champions willing to persevere and spend political capital to see the final rules through to publication.
TGWEA 规则制定过程还需要内部拥护者愿意坚持不懈并花费政治资本来推动最终规则的发布。
At Treasury, then-U.S. Treasurer Malerba and OTNA staff played these roles.
在当时的美国财政部财务主管 Malerba 和 OTNA 工作人员扮演了这些角色。
It is not hyperbole to say that the TGWEA regulations would not exist without both the TTAC and OTNA infrastructure and agency officials who understood the high stakes and pushed through bureaucratic resistance.
毫不夸张地说，如果没有 TTAC 和 OTNA 基础设施以及了解高风险并克服官僚阻力的机构官员，TGWEA 法规就不会存在。
Realizing the full promise of the TGWEA regulations will require concerted action by Tribal governments and federal policymakers.
实现 TGWEA 法规的全部承诺需要部落政府和联邦政策制定者采取一致行动。
The following recommendations address an array of implementation risks, reinforce the core mandate of deference to Tribal sovereignty, and extend the institutional lessons of the TGWEA rulemaking process.
以下建议解决了一系列实施风险，强化了尊重部落主权的核心任务，并扩展了 TGWEA 规则制定过程的制度经验教训。
A federal tax agency that once audited powwow prizes, ceremonial payments, and school supply programs now operates under regulations that explicitly defer to Tribal governments in providing culturally and socially appropriate benefits and services to Tribal citizens.
联邦税务机构曾经对仪式奖品、仪式付款和学校供应计划进行审计，现在按照明确遵循部落政府的规定运作，为部落公民提供适合文化和社会的福利和服务。
That outcome is the product of decades of sustained, unified Tribal advocacy, a robust institutional structure maintained across four administrations, and remarkable acts of leadership.
这一成果是部落几十年来持续、统一的倡导、四届政府维持的强有力的制度结构以及卓越的领导行为的产物。
The regulations are enormously consequential.
这些法规意义重大。
They settle long-standing questions of tax treatment of Tribal benefits and services, eliminate structural disadvantages for Tribal enterprises, and—perhaps most significantly—create a legal framework in which Tribal governments can make genuine choices about how best to deploy their resources for the welfare of their citizens.
它们解决了部落福利和服务的税收待遇方面长期存在的问题，消除了部落企业的结构性劣势，并且——也许最重要的是——创建了一个法律框架，使部落政府可以在如何最好地部署其资源以造福公民的问题上做出真正的选择。
They also create genuine opportunities for Tribes to transform the impact and effectiveness of their general assistance programs and reshape reservation economies.
它们还为部落创造了真正的机会，以改变其一般援助计划的影响和有效性，并重塑保留地经济。
The TGWEA rulemaking process demonstrated something that federal Indian law practitioners have long argued but rarely been able to capture: how to build institutional conditions within a federal agency that honors Tribal sovereignty.
TGWEA 的规则制定过程展示了印度联邦法律从业者长期以来一直争论但很少能够抓住的一点：如何在联邦机构内建立尊重部落主权的制度条件。
It is what the federal trust responsibility requires, and it is what effective governance demands.
这是联邦信托责任所要求的，也是有效治理所要求的。